Collective letter s to Stereophile

I'll play devil's advocate. Perhaps Stereophile prefers to review products from established manufacturers with wide distribution and the resources to follow up with customer service. The magazine has more appeal if it can lead consumers to products that are readibly availabe and have parts and service readibly available rather than the contrary. It would make sense to reward those companies with a good track record. These manufacturers have an established following waiting for reviews of thier latest products. Besides, well established companies who have had previous good reviews probably have the biggest advertising budget. The manufacturers and the magazines have a symbiotic relationship that co-depends on each others success. If the magazines truly wanted to help the consumer, they would keep gear on hand that it's readership typicaly owns (Stereophile has taken readers surveys), note manufacturers reliabilty and service record as well as expected resale value. The magazines would make special note of appropriate technical and sonic compatibilities. The magazines would compare the items of comparable value vis a vis possible new and used alternatives. While the last suggestion is fraught with diffuculty it is not impossible as most of us who use Audiogon do this all the time.

I think they are creating some kind of monopoly or at less prevent free competition in the market. Clearly, if a product from a new company didn't get exposure/review or intentionally unfavourable review in an audio magazine. Nobody will buy it and the new company will fall very fast. At the end, only a handful of manufacturers will share a large portion of the market share. Which is exactly what happening now. Both the manufacturer and the magazine are the in the same side. Favourable reviews(even though the product under review is no good at all) means more sale, more money and then more and bigger ad in the magazine. I think the government should look into this kind of unethical practices.

Check out Audioperfectionist.com and you will find out why this happen.

I basically agree with your comments but you should remove Dunlavy from your list of "preferred companies". Believe me, there is a LOT of "funny" circumstances around what took place with the SC-IV. Besides that, how many Dunlavy products have been reviewed compared to Musical Fidelity, Harmon International, etc ??? I only know of the SC IV off the top of my head and they demoted that one as it is. Sean
>

I too would love to see a wider range of equipment reviewed, especially stuff that's hot in the market. Why, for example, no review of some of the better one-box cd players by Audiomeca, Audio Aero, or EMC (and I don't mean a crummy Tellig review)? On the other hand, the magazine is extremely resource limited -- it's getting thinner and thinner due to lack of advertising, as most consumers are now into home theater. Also, Stereophile may avoid reviewing equipment made by small companies with limited distribution, because a bad review could put the company under, and a good review could do the same if the company can't keep up with the demand created, thereby angering prospective buyers.